SCOTUS ruling just in -- clears way for gay marriage in California (law, retired)

[zdg]

Originally Posted by CousinMaynard

Us "Yes on 8" voters have had our votes taken away by activist judges, our state government is openly defying the will of the people, and the supreme court has just ruled thats its ok by them that citizens have no voice.

So you're against gay marriage and now you're also for dismantling the Supreme Court?

[Gentoo]

Originally Posted by CousinMaynard

instead of editing out what you wanted to read, why not read the rest. its good for all of us to have a look in the mirror every now and then:

I didn't edit out what I didn't want. I clearly said I didn't keep reading along. The reason is, this was all I felt the need to respond to. Rather than editing out what I said why not read the rest as my reason was in there. See how that works?

[zdg]

Originally Posted by CousinMaynard

the scotus did not rule on prop 8. not at all

they ruled that a state appointed judge, and the politicians who appointed those judges, can conspire to overturn the will of the people, and the people have no voice to defend their will. dont take my word for it, read the article thats in the op.

Funny, isn't it? As soon as the Supreme Court tells you states-rights Republicans that gay marriage is a states-rights issue, the system is broken because your views lost?

[CousinMaynard]

Originally Posted by zdg

So you're against gay marriage and now you're also for dismantling the Supreme Court?

im def'ly against quote farming/cherry picking to try and make it look someone is saying something theyre not, so now you not only know that, you can quote me on it. dont know what else to say, other than get back to me whenever youre ready to address my opinion as a whole

[zdg]

Originally Posted by CousinMaynard

im def'ly against quote farming/cherry picking to try and make it look someone is saying something theyre not, so now you not only know that, you can quote me on it. dont know what else to say, other than get back to me whenever youre ready to address my opinion as a whole

Your opinion as a whole is suggesting that we get rid of elected and appointed judges because they only serve to undermine the will of the people. Your opinion as a whole is that a majority of voters should be sufficient to decide the fate of the cities, states, and union without oversight or officials to ensure those votes are legal under the basic protections of the very Constitution (and underlying laws) that conservatives pretend to hold so dear.

You YES ON 8 people voted on something that was declared ineligible to be voted on in the first place. It wasn't your voice that was taken away, it was your illegal decision to declare a significant fraction of this (and every other) state sub-human and not worthy of the same status and protection you enjoy simply because your biochemistry finds the opposite sex attractive.

The issue you voted FOR hurts people. The issue it OVERTURNED hurt nobody.

[Gentoo]

Originally Posted by zdg

Your opinion as a whole is suggesting that we get rid of elected and appointed judges because they only serve to undermine the will of the people. Your opinion as a whole is that a majority of voters should be sufficient to decide the fate of the cities, states, and union without oversight or officials to ensure those votes are legal under the basic protections of the very Constitution (and underlying laws) that conservatives pretend to hold so dear.

You YES ON 8 people voted on something that was declared ineligible to be voted on in the first place. It wasn't your voice that was taken away, it was your illegal decision to declare a significant fraction of this (and every other) state sub-human and not worthy of the same status and protection you enjoy simply because your biochemistry finds the opposite sex attractive.

The issue you voted FOR hurts people. The issue it OVERTURNED hurt nobody.

Dammit I can't rep you again but well said!

[pch1013]

Originally Posted by CousinMaynard

Us "Yes on 8" voters have had our votes taken away by activist judges

That's right, because Prop 8 has been found unconstitutional.

If a majority of voters in liberal San Francisco were to vote in favor of banning all guns here, that would be found unconstitutional too, and the vote would be invalidated.

See how that works?

[CousinMaynard]

Originally Posted by Gentoo

I didn't edit out what I didn't want. I clearly said I didn't keep reading along. The reason is, this was all I felt the need to respond to. Rather than editing out what I said why not read the rest as my reason was in there. See how that works?

ok i get it, you prefer staying uninformed and missing the point. got it. but do me a favor, where your going with that, keep it away from my posts.

[Gentoo]

Originally Posted by CousinMaynard

ok i get it, you prefer staying uninformed and missing the point. got it. but do me a favor, where your going with that, keep it away from my posts.

Your posts speak volumes about your ability to respond to the issue. Rather than doing that, you'd rather talk about the posts and the people posting them. Keep going.

[Gentoo]

Originally Posted by pch1013

That's right, because Prop 8 has been found unconstitutional.

If a majority of voters in liberal San Francisco were to vote in favor of banning all guns here, that would be found unconstitutional too, and the vote would be invalidated.

See how that works?

^This